Continuing the discussion from Did Seth suggest that Jane quit smoking, and why?:
I can't tell you how many times I've wondered this. In fact I'd say it's one of the great things I still don't understand about reality creation. Where precisely the line exists between, "this is a rule of the physical plane, and you created your reality by joining this plane and thus living by this rule" and "this is not a rule but purely a manifestation of your beliefs". It seems clear that there are things which fall into the former category, e.g. that we have 4 limbs. Would a belief that radiation isn't a thing make us immune to radiation, or simply cause us to avoid it? I know certainly that unconscious avoidance is a relevant form of reality creation. After all, "I live in a safe universe" and so I do. Something may supposedly "exist" but it does not exist in my experience and thus it may as well not exist.
I dropped my body fat from ~16% ("average") to 11% ("lean"), my waist from 32" my entire adult life (approaching 34") now down to 30". It was 100% Seth exercises that put me on the path, but what those exercises ended up doing was leading me to a very particular ... thing. Upon studying that thing I realized it was the most agreeable scientifically sound thing I had ever read about weight that explained absolutely every puzzle. So of course I believed in it. It was like discovering the Seth material all over again explaining reality but this time for explaining weight loss. Now I can't help but wonder, is this a "true" discovery, aspect of our plane, or is it entirely hypnotic? So far I lean toward it being a "true" discovery, at least as "true" as other common medical knowledge (it concerns the effects of insulin on fat storage). After all, it seems many of the systems and chemicals we are aware of do indeed do the things we think they do, adrenaline for instance, which as I recall Seth backs up. Generally where we are mistaken is in the more exotic aspects, like the mental source of these physical/chemical triggers, and others unseen.
For instance I'd say viruses indeed have some of the qualities Science believes them to have, but where they are wrong is in regard to the cause, as the cause is always mental - the virus is not the cause but the effect, or medium of the effect. And as we know (and Science doesn't) alleged "bad" viruses transform into alleged "good" viruses. So there was additional information here from Seth, but some of these behaviors are nevertheless true of our physical plane although of course belief has a great impact upon them.
So I can't help but wonder, might not this role of insulin be a legitimate force, a medium, a true thing, and our beliefs would then be the cause that affects our insulin response to sugar? So just as it is not accurate to say, "a virus causes a cold", I do not mean to say, "insulin resistance causes fat storage", but rather that I mean to say, "beliefs can cause a virus to cause a cold (or do something helpful)" and "beliefs can cause unfavorable insulin response that stores fat". Does this not follow logically? When I have attempted to bring up my discovery in this area in the past and recommend reading Why We Get Fat by Gary Taubes I am met with, "well no, this isn't legitimate, it's beliefs that are legitimate", but I never meant to refute that. Beliefs are and always will be the prime movers, but perhaps Taubes's work can still be very accurate, and is showing the pathways through which a belief change would indeed alter the body.
But just as there is therapy, including natural therapy, for a physical ailment while the beliefs are worked on beneath, isn't it fair and possible to make a physical action, such as lowering sugar intake, while also working on those beleifs, and thus accelerate the body's weight loss quite drastically? I don't mean to say that a belief change about weight gain wouldn't cause the appropriate body response on its own (which very well may be the regaining of insulin sensitivity) but as human beings we can grow impatient. And isn't it fair to say that the changing of a belief not only causes an internal change but also suggests changes in behavior to accelerate the process, just as an animal seeks medicinal herbs [NoPR]? And I by no means suggest the outright demonization of carbohydrates (and Gary Taubes truly doesn't either), or that such behavioral change be permanent (rather it's simply to correct an imbalance) but the science seems very useful and practical and beyond the scope of a fad diet - and it seems it can be of significant benefit and still harmonious with Seth's teachings. Am I wrong? I want to see other Sethies take up this experiment. Even if it is an entirely hypnotic effect to lose weight it's still the most constructive one I've seen, and though there may be many ways up the mountain, why not try this recently blazed easier path? Belief is a tool, and as you may recall Seth saying in regard to doctors, "use the belief since you possess it", there is no shame in not being able to 100% will a new belief upon ourselves, and no strict requirement to do so.